Ireland in the world order: a history of uneven development

Ireland in the world order:a history of uneven developmentMaurice Coakley(Pluto Press, £17.50)ISBN 9780745331256

At first glance, judging by the title, I thought this was a book in the Michael Richter mode, treating Irish history in a wide international spectrum. But it turns out that the world framework in question is for the most part Scotland, Wales and England from the twelfth century onward. In the latter part of the book, however, Wales has disappeared from the scene and there is selective reference to more distant countries and to the North Atlantic area generally. The book ends with both a general summary of its arguments and a consideration of Ireland in the present ‘world order in disarray’. The ‘development’ referred to in the subtitle is mainly economic, but with attention to attendant social, religious, cultural and political factors, as well as to the formation of nations and of centralised states.

The author seems to have read—and he quotes from—an immense range of books on general and specific themes. Dip into this work at any point and you will find yourself reading a fascinating account of the socio-economics and culture of Ireland or of some other country or region in some period or other of the last 800 years. Coakley writes very clearly, but because he mentions several—sometimes many—aspects of the many matters he deals with, the text is dense.

In the nine pages devoted to medieval Irish Gaelic society we learn that in a pastoral society the facility to accumulate cattle is accompanied by the facility to seize the wealth of a vulnerable party and the ability to escape from domination by moving from one chief’s territory to another’s. The clan chiefs of Gaelic Scotland maintained connections in the Lowlands and in Edinburgh. The Reformation, by its emphasis on Bible-reading, increased literacy, thereby giving those who converted a practical advantage over those who did not. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the Anglo-Irish landlords failed to introduce capitalist agriculture—a facilitator elsewhere of urban industrialisation—because they did not manage to achieve an accepted leadership role vis-à-vis their tenants, as the landlords did in Scotland and northern England. In Bengal, the East India Company’s introduction of individual land ownership was not quite as disruptive as that same measure had been in Ireland because the older stratum of tribute collectors, the zamindars, became a landowning class.

All those are more or less relevant facts. The summary of the book’s arguments at the end does not compensate, however, for the repeated absence of a clear main argument every few pages, as the book proceeds through torrents of facts, moving from one country to another. I found myself repeatedly exclaiming, ‘But your main argument here?’ I found myself imagining a better-organised and probably shorter book. It would have three sections dealing respectively with Ireland from 1200 to, say, 1650; then from 1650 to 1922; and finally from independence to the present. The first two sections would be headed ‘Four reasons why Ireland in this period was comparatively undeveloped, accompanied in each case by illustrative comparisons from elsewhere’. And the third section would be headed ‘Has Ireland achieved adequate development since independence?’

The chapters dealing with Ireland since independence are lucid and—up to a point—insightful. That limiting point is represented jointly, if variously, by the late Dr Raymond Crotty’s argument in Ireland in crisis: a study in capitalist colonial undevelopment that a nation disrupted by capitalist colonialism must remain permanently ‘undeveloped’; the psychiatrist Dr Garret O’Connor’s writings on the continuing impact on the collective Irish psyche of a historically induced ‘malignant shame’; and the statements of Pearse and Connolly to the effect that the Easter Rising was directed as much against the Irish ‘slave soul’ as it was against British rule in Ireland.

Maurice Coakley says nothing about the collective psychology underlying the very low degree of economic enterprise in Ireland since independence—quite shocking when compared with, say, the amount of enterprise which in Norway, after independence in 1905, made that poor country securely one of the most prosperous in the world. Consequently, in his citing of foreign places and peoples for comparison with Ireland, he does not mention Hong Kong and what poor, but uncolonised, Chinese made of that barren island.

This omission of consideration of the psychological effect of long colonisation leaves a question mark hovering over the book’s treatment of Ireland since independence. HI

Desmond Fennell’s latest book is Third stroke did it: the staggered end of European civilisation (PubliBook Ireland).

'

That field of glory. The story of Clontarf, from battleground to garden suburb Read More

Darkest Dublin: The story of the Church Street disaster and a pictorial account of the slums of Dublin in 1913Read More

Personal Histories

Personal Histories is an initiative by History Ireland,
which aims to capture the individual histories of Irish
people both in Ireland and around the world. It is hoped
to build an extensive database reflecting Irish lives,
giving them a chance to be heard, remembered and to
add their voice to the historical record.
Click Here to go to the Personal Histories page

On this Day

1981 Sir Norman Stronge, former speaker of the Stormont parliament, and his son James were shot dead by the Provisional IRA at their home, Tynan Abbey, close to the Armagh/Monaghan border.

1933 George Moore (80), author, notably of Esther Waters (1894), and leading light in the Irish Literary Revival, died.

1924 Vladimir Ilyich Lenin (53), communist revolutionary and premier of the Soviet Union since 1922, died of a stroke.

1922 The Craig–Collins agreement promised an end to the ‘Belfast Boycott’—the ban on northern goods coming into the South—in return for Catholics intimidated out of the Belfast shipyards being allowed to return.

1919 The first Dáil Éireann convened at the Mansion House, Dublin.

Above: Scene from the Battle of Isandlwana, 22 January 1879, the British Army’s heaviest military defeat by the Zulus. (Maynooth University Library)

1879(Jan.21–23)The Battle of Isandlwana/Rorke’s Drift. For many, the six-month Zulu War, prompted by the invasion of King Cetshwayo’s independent kingdom by British colonial forces under Lord Chelmsford, is viewed through the prism of the 1964 movie Zulu, which portrayed, with considerable artistic licence, the epic defence of a mission station—named after Irishman James Rorke, who had a trading store there— by c. 100 British troops (including a dozen or so Irishmen) against c. 3,000 Zulus. Thanks to Chelmsford, this strategically insignificant engagement was widely publicised. The bravery and self-sacrifice of the plucky Brits was applauded—no mention was made, of course, of their execution of c. 500 Zulu prisoners—and no less than eleven VCs were awarded (in contrast with one VC each for the 1944 D-Day landings and the entire Battle of Britain). All of this was designed by Chelmsford to distract British public attention from what had preceded it: the crushing defeat of his army at Isandlwana, with the loss of over 1,300 of his men, including many Irishmen, by the main c. 20,000-strong Zulu army, armed with spears and shields. While British gallantry was duly extolled (such as the heroic last stand of County Leitrim’s Col. Anthony Durnford and the valiant but fatal effort by Dubliner Lt. Nevill Coghill to retrieve his regiment’s colours), her historians are still trying to explain the defeat. Causes include the lack of screwdrivers to loosen the screws on the ammunition boxes. From a Zulu perspective, Isandlwana was a glorious victory—but a pyrrhic one. Cetshwayo knew that the British would regroup and re-invade, which they did. Superior numbers and technology prevailed, and by July, after six more battles, Zululand was entirely subjugated.